Foreign Policy Discussion: Russia

CRIMEA LAST 48 HRS:

Putin ramps up armor, air cav, SAMs.
Accuses Ukraine of terror, killing FSB agent.
Cuts off internet.
 
CqT73pbXYAAYyqr.jpg


CqT73pqWgAADn7B.jpg
 
It may may be time for Obama to pick up the phone on which "the 1980s called looking for their foreign policy".
 
iatrogenic said:
It may may be time for Obama to pick up the phone on which "the 1980s called looking for their foreign policy".
Click to expand...

We're going to have great relations with Russia. With Mike Flynn and Rex Tilllerson in Trump's world class cabinet, we will broker the best deals with Putin. We will make Russia our friends again (MROFA!). We will have the best cooperation with Russia, like we did in World War II with Stalin.
 
Has Hillary blame the Russian ambassador's death on a You Tube video?
Or did she blame it on "the Russians" themselves?
 
CNN guest Jill Dougherty is trying to humanize the terrorist, saying he was "emotional". Whitewash already unfolding.

 
So a ruthless brutal head of a large country seems to be saying he will go after a ruthless and brutal group of people.
I am guessing in Putin's mind the red line was crossed.
I am also guessing:smokin: Putin has no respect for BO.
 
Joe Fan said:
ouchie


Click to expand...


Good for him. The tie of this assassin to ISIS is tenable at best but if it means ramping up their focus on ISIS rather than US favored rebels then that's good.

This is a little like Texas football losing to Kansas and saying "we'll make TCU pay!"
 
Musberger, how do you defend Russian revisionist history?
Is this what Russian history books teach you guys?

The reality is that Russia and the Nazis jointly started WWII by invading and dividing Poland, per prior agreement. OK, the Germans crossed the border first but this would be of no difference to those families/friends of all the Poles the Russians deported and killed 1939-41.

Second, in total, Russian commies killed far more people than Hitler

Last, they did not fight the Germans alone

How do you guys not know this?

DH8xfWDXgAE0dym.jpg
 
Here again -- about 9M were killed/murdered in this revolution

Then ~15 years after this, Stalin killed over 10 million peasants for their trouble

I thought starting in 1990, Russian children got real history books?


 
Last edited:
Joe Fan said:
Here again -- about 9M were killed/murdered in this revolution

Then ~15 years after this, Stalin killed over 10 million peasants for their trouble

I thought starting in 1990, Russian children got real history books?


Click to expand...

If you think I'm going to defend a communist regime under Stalin that murdered and sent tens of thousands to labor camps in Siberia you don't know me very well. But as far as defeating the Nazis, the USSR did most of the heavy lifting. There's no denying that.
 
Joe Fan said:
Musberger, how do you defend Russian revisionist history?
Is this what Russian history books teach you guys?

The reality is that Russia and the Nazis jointly started WWII by invading and dividing Poland, per prior agreement. OK, the Germans crossed the border first but this would be of no difference to those families/friends of all the Poles the Russians deported and killed 1939-41.

Second, in total, Russian commies killed far more people than Hitler

Last, they did not fight the Germans alone

How do you guys not know this?

DH8xfWDXgAE0dym.jpg
Click to expand...

And the irony of this is that they issued this tweet on the anniversary of the signing of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact (the agreement allowing Hitler and Stalin to carve up and butcher Poland).

There has definitely been an effort to paint the Soviet Union as the "good guy" in WWII when in reality they entered the War as a matter of self-preservation. Hitler's plan for "Lebensraum" necessarily meant the conquering of at least the western portion of the Soviet Union, and he made this clear in Mein Kampf. There was no avoiding war other than in short term. Stalin had to defeat Hitler merely to preserve his country. That's not a bad reason to fight by any means, but it isn't a moral reason. They sure as hell didn't do it to stop the Holocaust or to liberate anybody. Hell, they forced tens of millions of people out of Nazi rule but into communist dictatorships for 45 years for no reason other than the fact that they were unlucky enough to live in Eastern Europe.

As for the debate about who was more important to defeating Germany, Musburger is right. The Red Army did more than anybody. They sent the most troops to battle, killed more Nazis, and suffered the most. They both accomplished and sacrificed the most. However, that isn't the same issue as who needed whom. Without the US and Britain, the Nazis would have been in a one-front war against a more poorly armed and poorly funded Red Army. Had that happened, Germany would have almost surely won on the Eastern Front. The USSR definitely needed the United States to survive.

Could the US have defeated Germany without the USSR? Probably not, but I qualify that slightly because of the nuclear issue. We could have used nukes in Germany and defeated them. However, to do that, Britain would have had to have survived without Germany fighting on the Eastern Front so we could have a base in Europe from which to launch attacks on Germany. Would they have survived? Possibly but not likely.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Weekly Prediction Contest

* Predict HORNS-AGGIES *
Sat, Nov 30 • 6:30 PM on ABC

Recent Threads

Prediction Results Threads

2024 Schedules

Back
Top